From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-oi1-f177.google.com (mail-oi1-f177.google.com [209.85.167.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFA46234964 for ; Tue, 12 May 2026 01:55:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.167.177 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778550954; cv=none; b=RJA2P0bpmBMmb7pVpDi7Km3VC2+1JfaTZv2fE5mJM5yAqoojgX3fcM4mFq3TMuLJELA22Ao8WIe22Lng0oUIYlqXOlGfKIAcZ7Z6dFMxuWkLlaZgR7y7k88Cr2kRYMEBtc1ajzm6ey7MgLZjTIz3xV0Z534hJwsCrVY4buWSfFA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778550954; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kwSpYYziqv4SEdevEEg/7aVLhcBkhUr7Z6Db89ZolOM=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:To:Cc:Subject:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=fh9MbOp/Dm4evRwZ9uFbDTJfS63P+rBXYSz7inWrmtvHG4g7ZzlEkw0vIEJivY8x/DoS8UuqdOe6cY7tBBr1FVMQtghihD3J2guuo9iDzd90AgPg7FhTgTIebeSjmjSVT0Y4/Kc2J0ZBgEObGWFV04gPKjjlUEBCZh0rHRufWCc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=jRzE8m1q; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.167.177 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="jRzE8m1q" Received: by mail-oi1-f177.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-479d593a0c3so4270228b6e.0 for ; Mon, 11 May 2026 18:55:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1778550952; x=1779155752; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=YAbwVAetbYyNoBOuPWIRYSYHV3st/5jwsKb4EPllJSI=; b=jRzE8m1qEbAgeSTTB6pg3spDHYnineafxcomOD8vvUFWe1acREeJHaIDus1NbrNSut BD1nmA2TAjWZMEgLH6AArpKrZfNs9+vNRZJVpwD5mQR4JHiiy3j0C0YR9yA70q4M0Se5 wacOEZbNGFNqTMI81eB/42kHFy28vj6a8HVz2jfignUyVJ/MLlB168oKwI/exZxEjcWv gVTm3kDv0kIiKMT6rQzA2d5d11QEaIDD/uRFM+bwC2qOtgDgfE1W44199UjSclN4tzGM cZUmgiKPxPXiBght/U1JKYKMBeT+82E2exk4KSDtfNbIZ+CP46aoCjk32QhroWWMvsrE Knzg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1778550952; x=1779155752; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YAbwVAetbYyNoBOuPWIRYSYHV3st/5jwsKb4EPllJSI=; b=jFxUXMeu2dRv2e6RiTnKTdTbfF4XUzoCuYxd9LH6HjXclU97SOQkwFomWr6VC3gPHr Xf8AG+grMA9IGSmv5+LJZTCu4O7SrtCSr2wM9IcvlBcL10f2LZvXPgzNhExV034VR2ou CXs5ZEh+mWxXEef+IGYo6ytBd8+DDtWk76YHxYAZ2e7UCNvqEMKZcCzgksC44KUcaRwU yXTP2lFSibqBuEUx4BiLwEkg6sg0wpQerjOM4huozrpLaT8GJeky2k2lgXhc5g3khSf8 m0WSpVbCaweLPqI71FkURGDOAEWoYQsurATcCKdRnj+DXFYEFUbzWF1ZfNcOgWiEbvfw LYIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzrRwC4q0vbD90FyfX1vpNETKLEMPb0t+VjNFC6pd0tDKnkInNi JO9MoHBjlPH5KSPXU4ua8myT4vB/7KhPZRxUKoI2T5S6yyZEqfDb1euU X-Gm-Gg: Acq92OHznksU0vEHXy5fwidXDQ7d6jKcbD9mNG92jQMFdDVDyv+3H5wqwljIGwwkqzk IjoEptZeu8/q7q1vyvJRUjpLs2MofPNzr+BHK7dhzCwNbJMJMJIdLQwjHUkRrrudRqUWgHkku+P 4s6OIUl29s6yakHzehEx4ysl7X43ijj7ZqAdDb5i7Fgzcvspjv0jyfZ9biwikgw/Bq0dBGWuGHC PO1X2gqdWh7WpVLPdeXyLW/fIDlAg6PiEGEJSsPetgIDjmlnHsffkS8oKbetGtQVd0sNq9NetCl PkU2UcRkp4+4JSXahYGZpRVEViAhJD9+38i1pqRqfavsKRJW+JhcGRA1OePEQ5b8R8PAiGuoqdG Z/AstZ5RhK3VXr3nXyivf6eYFJ1BE3IW0cK++fPGbp7o1UnCoWZVU/10JKiUdP6v0/W2w4xlaIs wqATxicvDmxxCfKafACI01c2sVNHki2etS05Fk8iK4GYSthEfEaWojnXTXQHKdFlZMXsgh0N6YW +MWe/YaWWLs8Voh8LVvbM2uIbE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:c40c:b0:47c:34fd:d3be with SMTP id 5614622812f47-48293d8a5bbmr1270270b6e.25.1778550951603; Mon, 11 May 2026 18:55:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a03:2880:10ff:3::]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 46e09a7af769-7e367be1173sm7993935a34.3.2026.05.11.18.55.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 11 May 2026 18:55:50 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: sashiko@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 18:55:50 -0700 Message-Id: To: "Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" , "Justin Suess" Cc: , "bpf" Subject: Re: [bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf: Offload kptr destructors that run from NMI From: "Alexei Starovoitov" X-Mailer: aerc References: <20260507175453.1140400-2-utilityemal77@gmail.com> <20260507234520.646C4C2BCB2@smtp.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: On Mon May 11, 2026 at 6:46 PM PDT, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote: > On Tue, 12 May 2026 at 03:43, Justin Suess wrot= e: >> >> On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 10:10:07PM +0200, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote: >> > On Mon, 11 May 2026 at 19:29, Alexei Starovoitov >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > On Mon May 11, 2026 at 9:38 AM PDT, Justin Suess wrote: >> > > > [ 21.604660] Call Trace: >> > > > [ 21.604662] >> > > > [ 21.604663] dump_stack_lvl+0x5d/0x80 >> > > > [ 21.604666] print_usage_bug.part.0+0x22b/0x2c0 >> > > > [ 21.604669] lock_acquire+0x295/0x2e0 >> > > > [ 21.604671] ? terminate_walk+0x33/0x160 >> > > > [ 21.604674] ? __call_rcu_common.constprop.0+0x309/0x730 >> > > > [ 21.604679] _raw_spin_lock+0x30/0x40 >> > > > [ 21.604680] ? __call_rcu_common.constprop.0+0x309/0x730 >> > > > [ 21.604682] __call_rcu_common.constprop.0+0x309/0x730 >> > > > [ 21.604686] bpf_obj_free_fields+0x118/0x250 >> > > > [ 21.604691] free_htab_elem+0x85/0xd0 >> > > > [ 21.604694] htab_map_delete_elem+0x168/0x230 >> > > > [ 21.604698] bpf_prog_f6a7136050cb5431_clear_task_kptrs_from_= nmi+0xeb/0x144 >> > > > [ 21.604700] bpf_trace_run3+0x126/0x430 >> > > >> > > that's better. >> > > Looks like we moved bpf_obj_free_fields() into htab_mem_dtor(), >> > > but left check_and_free_fields() in free_htab_elem(). >> > > >> > > I think the fix is to remove check_and_free_fields() from ma path in= free_htab_elem() >> > > and fallback to bpf_mem_alloc at map create time when map has kptrs >> > > with dtors. Even when BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC is not specified. >> > > >> > > Kumar, >> > > >> > > thoughts? >> > > >> > > >> > >> > Yeah, removing it from the path that helpers can invoke seems simpler. >> > Remember though, this splat is just for hashtab, we have similar >> > bpf_obj_free_fields() in array map on update. I think fundamentally >> > the main issue here is that we logically free special fields when a >> > map value is freed or deleted. When updating array maps we logically >> > 'free' and then 'update' the same map value together. For hashtab, it >> > happens on update/delete. >> > >> > We could relax this behavior to avoid eagerly freeing these special >> > fields on update or deletion. The only worry is how this would impact >> > programs that have come to rely on the existing behavior. There are >> > patterns where people expect kptr to be NULL on some new map value, >> > which causes programs to return errors when that expectation is not >> > met. Just doing the skip when irqs_disabled() doesn't save us from the >> > surprise side-effect. We need to decide upon this first before >> > discussing the shape of the solution. >> > >> > This is the theoretical concern; In practice, I think most people who >> > depend on such behavior use kptr in local storage maps (in >> > schedulers). So it probably won't be a problem in practice, even >> > though we can't judge this ahead of time. Also, we eagerly reuse map >> > values when using memalloc, so the guarantees are already pretty weak >> > I guess. >> > >> > So, if we are not going to go through a grace period (like local >> > storage) and free back to kernel allocator before reuse, we should >> > relax field freeing behavior. At best, we should cancel work for >> > timer, wq, task_work, and task_work, leaving other items as-is. E.g. >> > BPF_UPTR is used in task storage which I think is accessible to >> > tracing programs, I am not sure how safe unpin_user_page() is when >> > called from random reentrant contexts. We might have more cases in the >> > future, we cannot guarantee we can handle everything in NMIs >> > universally. >> > >> > So the best course of action seems to be relaxing >> > bpf_obj_free_fields() to bpf_obj_cancel_fields() that just does cancel >> > on async work (timer, wq, task_work) for delete / update and let other >> > fields be as-is. We likely need to do bpf_obj_free_fields() >> > additionally before prealloc_destroy() now, but that should be simple. >> > Whether or not to use bpf_ma when kptrs are used in prealloc map is a >> > separate change. >> > >> > This should hopefully resolve the issue, unless I missed other cases. >> This does sound good, so you'd set the bpf_obj_free_fields up in the >> htab allocator dtor for the final free and rely on the allocators >> existing nmi deferral? > > It is already set, except for prealloc maps. But we can call it before > destroying the pcpu freelist etc. htab_map_free->htab_free_prealloced_fields does bpf_obj_free_fields already= . So scratch my suggestion to force bpf_mem_alloc on preallocated hash maps. >> >> The missing piece is whether to handle this differently in NMI or just >> always do it with the deferral. Also the prealloc question needs >> answering. > > There is no deferral here. I'm saying that we just cancel for timer, > wq, task work, and leave other fields as is. So we don't have active > work pending for async items. > > So as long as the item keeps getting recycled in the allocator, we > don't free these fields. Once the memalloc is destroyed, the dtor runs > in a known safe context where we can assume bpf_obj_free_fields won't > deadlock or run into any problems. So the plan is to do if (in_nmi()) && case BPF_KPTR* | BPF_LIST_HEAD | BPF_RB_ROOT just ignore it? And no other changes anywhere at all? That would be too good to be true :)